LRC Note. We changed the title of the thread. It was initially entitled, "Just catching up. A man wins womens 200m in Ostrava . (Video)" As a courtesy, please do not call an intersex woman a man. You can make the argument that in your mind they are more biologically male than female."
They need to have equity across distances and extend the ban from 400m - mile to 0m - ultra. It's the only fair way. If I discovered I was intersex I would not line up on the start line and compete. When you read about it and testosterone you can see why it's totally unfair. It's the levels of testosterone.
It's not the levels of testosterone that makes the difference. Young boys who are very fast don't have lots of testosterone. It's a genetic trait.
The sport needs an intersex category.
Just call it non-binary and let's get it done next year. Intersex, M->F, F->M, etc. I don't blame any healthy individual for not wanting to lower their T levels with potential unknown adverse effects on whatever equilibrium their natural body has achieved. Let them compete in a new category. There only needs to be a dozen individuals or so at the highest levels to fill the lanes, and until such time that there is more representation maybe they can have the opportunity to compete at multiple events, or perhaps a rotating schedule. Once people got used to the idea they would start rooting for personalities just like usual in all of the other events.
If Felix had run her PR she would've won by over half a second. Seyni still couldn't compete with the best women in the world. It looked ridiculous because it was a slow race.
It's not the levels of testosterone that makes the difference. Young boys who are very fast don't have lots of testosterone. It's a genetic trait.
The sport needs an intersex category.
Just call it non-binary and let's get it done next year. Intersex, M->F, F->M, etc. I don't blame any healthy individual for not wanting to lower their T levels with potential unknown adverse effects on whatever equilibrium their natural body has achieved. Let them compete in a new category. There only needs to be a dozen individuals or so at the highest levels to fill the lanes, and until such time that there is more representation maybe they can have the opportunity to compete at multiple events, or perhaps a rotating schedule. Once people got used to the idea they would start rooting for personalities just like usual in all of the other events.
When this was done at Boston, the same people complaining about intersex and trans people, opposed having an intersex and trans category or qualifying standard.
Jock Semple would be proud11/20/2021 3:59pm EST4 years ago
The United Airlines New York City Half Marathon now has standards for men, women, and non-binary. Interestingly, the non-binary are EXACTLY the same as the women's standards. Is this the next step for Boston? "Non-binary" men...
You would need equal prize money and that was unacceptable to people who deny the existence of intersex and trans people and the validity of their existence.
It's mainly the hormones plus biological differences like size. What factor do you think is bigger than testosterone? Young boys and girls around 10 and 11 often don't have much of a difference between them in terms of sport. You can see it easily visually in things like rounders in PE. When male puberty kicks in the difference is vast. Testosterone makes a massive difference to women as well in terms of performance. Normal levels are about
women - 15-70 (ng/dl)
men - 265-923
These are rough figures but I just put them in to emphasise the difference, which is vast.
7–10 years old male - 1.80 to 5.68 female - 2.69 to 10.29
13–17 years old male - 208.08 to 496.58 female - 16.72 to 31.55
Of course there are other factors, but in adult humans, the ban (for those distances) refers to testosterone and reducing levels of testosterone.
I think you've made an error in claiming that female children ages 7-10 have significantly higher testosterone than males of the same age.
My understanding is that the Total Testosterone range for both sexes age 1-9 years is similar. After that, boys and girls diverge, with the boys having significantly higher T. I have never seen any material saying that girls age 7-10 normally have markedly higher T than boys of the same age.
The Mayo Clinic reference range for both boys and girls age 1-9 years is <7-20 ng/dL. After that the ranges are as follows:
1. I didn't claim that. I think you've actually made an error in claiming that I said that, when I didn't - or rather you've extrapolated something from the figures I provided that I didn't state. The figures I provided are a range therefore don't show that the mean or median is higher or lower in either case. The mean for males could be higher than for females.
2. I specifically said rough figures to emphasise a point
Environmental exposure to metals is ubiquitous, but its relation to androgen hormone levels is not well understood, especially in children and adolescents. This study aimed to explore the relationship between blood metal conc...
These are figures from one study, with many limitations. Just like a lot of studies. My point was that there are vastly higher testosterone levels in adolescent men than women. The same for adult men and women.
Actually in this study as well, it shows higher levels for girls age 6 than for boys.
1. I didn't claim that. I think you've actually made an error in claiming that I said that, when I didn't - or rather you've extrapolated something from the figures I provided that I didn't state. The figures I provided are a range therefore don't show that the mean or median is higher or lower in either case. The mean for males could be higher than for females.
2. I specifically said rough figures to emphasise a point
These are figures from one study, with many limitations. Just like a lot of studies. My point was that there are vastly higher testosterone levels in adolescent men than women. The same for adult men and women.
Actually in this study as well, it shows higher levels for girls age 6 than for boys.
50th percentile for boys age 6 was 1.9 ng/dL and for girls it was 2.4 ng/dL.
I've come across a fair amount that shows a drift where for a small period girls have higher levels, always before puberty.
I apologize for mistakenly interpreting what you were saying.
The first two links you gave are to the same study of data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) from 2011-2012, which
analyzed data from a subset of male children (age 6–11 years), male adolescents (age 12–19 years), female children (age 6–11 years), and female adolescents (age 12–19 years). Participants with missing data on blood metal levels, serum TT, and covariates were excluded from the analysis. In the final sample size, we assessed data from 431 male children, 493 male adolescents, 426 female children, and 470 female adolescents.
The way the researchers categorized the kids is strange in my view. It's misleading to lump girls age 6-11 all together in one category as though they're all one and the same because at 9, 10 and 11 many girls will already be well into puberty of adolescence, whereas most girls of 6 and 7 will still be pre-pubescent. At 10 and 11, quite a few girls will be menstruating already. Some girls start their periods at 9.
Research of this kind would be far more helpful if instead of categorizing kids solely by age, it categorized them by the developmental stages they are in as well - or instead. Doing that would also take into account an important issue that these researchers overlook: male and female youth who are the same exact chronological age during the the tween and early teen years are usually at starkly different stages of physical development and maturation.
The second study you linked to is basically a repeat of the first one, only it used NHANES from later years - 2013-2014 and 2015-2016. Its main finding is:
Testosterone concentration was not different between the sexes from age 6 to 10 years; however, male youths had greater testosterone concentrations than female youths from age 11 to 20 years.
Which is the main point in this discussion - and one you and I agree on.
As for both these studies using NHANES data showing that age 6 specifically girls had higher levels of testosterone than boys, that's interesting. I wonder why that's the case.
